Not far. Current LLMs have kinda stubbornness. They cling to their own conclusions even after you told them they are wrong. So if you ask them for proof, then most times they come up with something that’s convincing.
You know the thing where AI companies describe their alignment direction as “Honest, Harmless, Helpful”?
The only one that’s marketable to the idiots buying AI services is Helpful. So that’s always top priority even when it goes against the other two.
Average decider wouldn’t stand an “assistant” that sometimes answers “I don’t know”. So instead agent providers train their already hallucination-prone model to be 100% confident in whatever it says. Who cares if it’s true if it looks like it is?
I wonder when does the AI also hallicunate the sources such as webpages, pdfs, reports to prove its hallucinated point.
Don’t wanna ruin your hope, but we’re already there… https://alignment.openai.com/misalignment-reports/uploading-files-to-the-internet-in-order-to-cite-them/
Not far. Current LLMs have kinda stubbornness. They cling to their own conclusions even after you told them they are wrong. So if you ask them for proof, then most times they come up with something that’s convincing.
You know the thing where AI companies describe their alignment direction as “Honest, Harmless, Helpful”?
The only one that’s marketable to the idiots buying AI services is Helpful. So that’s always top priority even when it goes against the other two.
Average decider wouldn’t stand an “assistant” that sometimes answers “I don’t know”. So instead agent providers train their already hallucination-prone model to be 100% confident in whatever it says. Who cares if it’s true if it looks like it is?